Let's remember, uwe took the time to register at the forum, and took the time to post an explanation for what upset him.
I asked people to post their feelings about this - so he was just doing what i asked, and i appreciate that he took the time to make a public post about it.
And his follow up post was very respectful, so i welcome his comments and i appreciate that you took the time to post them uwe.
sentinel, regarding calling it donationware, i think that would be reasonable too, although i have a slightly unconvential view of what the definition of donationware should be. i have written elsewhere on this forum this:
"like i was saying there is some real "muddlement" in the definition of donationware.
most people seem to refer to donationware any software whose author asks users to consider making a donation.
this seems to me totally useless as a definition. it says nothing about the program at all.
to me it makes more sense to say a program is donationware if it REQUIRES a donation but the donation amount is left up to user.
if it has no restrictions at all then its freeware, regardless of whether author asks for donations or not."
but i do recognize that the approach we are taking here is more annoying than what people normally call donationware, and it might be clearer to call it donationware, or "registerware".
Recent Posts